2001 Patriots Own a Peculiar Record

2020 Patriots Season:
Upcoming Opponent:
Next Up: vs 49ers
Pick Results: SF: 27.6% at NE: 72.4%
Sun
Oct 25th

Current Patriots Twitter Feed:
Status
Not open for further replies.

IcyPatriot

Moderator
Staff member
PatsFans.com Supporter
2019 Weekly Picks Winner
Worst Records Of Super Bowl Champions Through X Games
So the Patriots had the single worst record, either alone or tied with other teams, of any Super Bowl champion through X games, for all values of X from 1 to 11. At 6-5, the 2011 Giants were tied with the Patriots (and ’88 49ers) for worst record, and the 2011 Giants hold the mark for worst record of any Super Bowl champion through X games, for all values of X from 11 to 16. The graph below shows the winning percentages of both teams after each game of the regular season.
 

brdmaverick

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I don't find this to be surprising. If we're being realistic I'd say the 2001 Pats were one of the worst Super Bowl champs in at least the 21st century. I'm not saying they are THE worst, but one of the worst.

While many will take offense to that I don't think we should because in order to be on this list for consideration the team MUST BE A SUPER BOWL CHAMP! That's right, they were champs and as such should be celebrated for their accomplishments.

If we're looking at pure talent though, the 2001 team probably not at the standard of other Super Bowl champs. To their credit, they were a bunch of guys who played well together, got a few good bounces, and did just enough to win (and I am so thankful for that).

In the team's 3 playoff games, they had a total of three offensive touchdowns. I don't think we'll ever see anything like that again.

Again, not the worst, there were definitely a few teams that have them beat for that title (like the 2011 Giants). We should be ok with that though, they were still champs and I enjoyed the ride.
 

robertweathers

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I don't find this to be surprising. If we're being realistic I'd say the 2001 Pats were one of the worst Super Bowl champs in at least the 21st century. I'm not saying they are THE worst, but one of the worst.

While many will take offense to that I don't think we should because in order to be on this list for consideration the team MUST BE A SUPER BOWL CHAMP! That's right, they were champs and as such should be celebrated for their accomplishments.

If we're looking at pure talent though, the 2001 team probably not at the standard of other Super Bowl champs. To their credit, they were a bunch of guys who played well together, got a few good bounces, and did just enough to win (and I am so thankful for that).

In the team's 3 playoff games, they had a total of three offensive touchdowns. I don't think we'll ever see anything like that again.

Again, not the worst, there were definitely a few teams that have them beat for that title (like the 2011 Giants). We should be ok with that though, they were still champs and I enjoyed the ride.
Since when have the NEP been about sheer talent? They are about playing well when it matters.

With that said teams don't win 14 of their final 17 games and allow 14ppg in the process with ****ty talent.

The only reason people consider that roster to be crap is because they weren't popular yet.
 

brdmaverick

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
With that said teams don't win 14 of their final 17 games and allow 14ppg in the process with ****ty talent.

The only reason people consider that roster to be crap is because they weren't popular yet.

I knew it wouldn't be long before someone took offense, and you obviously are free to have a differing opinion BUT please don't misread my opinion.

Nowhere did I say they had a **tty roster or that it was crap.

No team will win a Super Bowl with a **tty roster. This team won a Super Bowl. The context of this conversation is comparing the greatest Super Bowl winning teams of all time.

They are all going to be really good teams that played well together, had talent, and made the plays they needed to make when it counted most........that's a given. But this conversation is comparing those teams, and even though they are all great there are some that are going to be greater than others.

Sure, it's picking straws..........like comparing 20 different super models. The "ugliest" super model is still going to be an absolute knock out and worthy of magazine covers.

Just in a realistic fashion, if I take the last 20 Super Bowl winning teams, I'm finding it hard to find 5 that I would rank worse than the 2001 Pats.

The 2011 Giants is a given, and while I want to say the 2007 Giants that may just be my bias playing with me.

The knee jerk reaction is to say the 2000 Ravens and 2015 Broncos because their offense was poor, but in each case their defense was just so absolute, other-worldy that I would give them the nod, too.

2010 Packers, 2012 Ravens, 2005 Steelers - perhaps worth a conversation and could go either way. Perhaps worth a conversation, but still not clear cut that they are worse than the 2001 Pats.

That's the beauty of sports debates, nothing is ever clear cut and worth a debate, but yes, my opinion on this is that they are still one of the bottom five Super Bowl winners from the past 20.
 

cmasspatsfan

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
Since when have the NEP been about sheer talent? They are about playing well when it matters.

With that said teams don't win 14 of their final 17 games and allow 14ppg in the process with ****ty talent.

The only reason people consider that roster to be crap is because they weren't popular yet.
I agree, they had a good defense but the offense under TB hadn't blossomed yet.
 

chris_in_sunnyvale

In the Starting Line-Up
2019 Weekly Picks Winner
I don't find this to be surprising. If we're being realistic I'd say the 2001 Pats were one of the worst Super Bowl champs in at least the 21st century. I'm not saying they are THE worst, but one of the worst.

It's been quoted and sourced in this forum before: After winning SB36, BB said "I can't believe we won it with this team." I think BB was being realistic, too.

Realistic champs, though :fistpump:

Regards,
Chris
 

Palm Beach Pats Fan

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
2019 Weekly Picks Winner
2020 Weekly NFL Picks Winner
The only reason people consider that roster to be crap is because they weren't popular yet.

A second reason would be the 2002 season was bad, and it seemed that the talent level was somewhere between the accomplishments of those two seasons.

2003 brought more depth and maturity, then 2004 added more pieces, including of course Corey Dillon. It's pretty clear that the sheer talent level rose from 2001 to 2004, by quite a lot.

But you're right in that NE wins are not often correlated to an overall roster talent advantage over the opposition. I would argue that the talent/versatility/contributions of NE players who you'd normally think of as being in the bottom 10 or 15 on the roster has consistently provided a clear advantage over other teams. Much more so than any difference in top-end talent, as judged by pro bowls, all league teams, etc.
 

Digit

Practice Squad Player
I'm just happy that the 2001 team bought BB time to form the -real- Lion Voltron. That team was like, I dunno, Gladiator Voltron or Vehicle Voltron.
 

brdmaverick

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Really? Your idea of beauty is like a pageant in Booger Hollow, Arkansas.

When Robert Weathers disagreed at least he put some football counterpoints to take into consideration.

If your attempt at humor was at least mixed in with some thoughtful debate I could at least respect you trying to lighten the mood, but on it's own just leaves me scratching my head that you felt this was a positive contribution to the conversation.

Ok, there's my old man rant. Perhaps your comment was 'a hit' with others and I should chill with my 'get off my lawn' mentality.
 

brdmaverick

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I agree, they had a good defense but the offense under TB hadn't blossomed yet.

I agree, you can't go off names alone. Tom Brady was still more of a 'game manager' at that point and not the elite QB we've known him to be.

It would be like looking back at the 2011 team and thinking of Julian Edelman as the 'stud of today'.
 

Taco

Third String But Playing on Special Teams
Anyone I got any info on the 2001 Pats special teams rankings? I seem to remember Troy Brown coming up big on a few punt returns!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top